Talk:Allied States Department of Foreign Affairs
Embassy policy Are you giving the same rights? --BIPU 22:31, March 18, 2012 (UTC) :Yes, if you accept my terms I know you expect the same from me. Alternatively, you can have your own conditions. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 16:34, March 19, 2012 (UTC) No. I'm not giving you a foothold in my major cities to launch an invasion. Woogers - talk ( ) 22:44, March 18, 2012 (UTC) :Really are they going to start an invasion from a single building in your capital city? :) --BIPU 22:59, March 18, 2012 (UTC) ::Consulates count as part of embassies as well. And since it's "his own territory" he might justify defending it with an entire brigade of soldiers. Maybe a tank or two. Woogers - talk ( ) 23:04, March 18, 2012 (UTC) ::Ok... lets solve the problem limiting the diplomatic missions to a 70 sq metres apartment. :) --BIPU 23:07, March 18, 2012 (UTC) ::Anyway, all diplomatic personel have to be accredited by the hosting nation and the hosting nation can expel them at any time.--BIPU 23:10, March 18, 2012 (UTC) :::This doesn't apply to his diplomatic staff because he's not a signatory of VCDR. Which is why approving these rules is a bad idea for any host country. Woogers - talk ( ) 23:21, March 18, 2012 (UTC) :::It's still lunacy to think I am going to airdrop paratroopers and tanks into the embassy's yard and invade your capital city. Tanks and stuff will protect embassies in hostile and unstable countries. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 16:34, March 19, 2012 (UTC) Hmm... let me think................................................Nope. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 22:52, March 18, 2012 (UTC) He is not asking more than all we are giving usually. The difference is that he is asking us to put it in a contract. I dont see too many problems if there is reciprocity. --BIPU 22:59, March 18, 2012 (UTC) I'm not allowing an embassy to do this in Copenhagen. Synthic 23:00, March 18, 2012 (UTC) BIPU and I the only homies who will have any formal relations. ASA and Euskadi = brolliace. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 16:28, March 19, 2012 (UTC) :lol Really, if ASA is going to invade Euskadi the less important thing is the fact that they have an appartment in the middle of Bilbao. :) :I have no problem signing this with Euskadi (I suppose it would be difficult with DDR but I´m not thinking as DDR by the moment). The only objection is to avoid ASA to deploy heavy military stuff as tanks and artillery in the garden of the embassy. It is not a diplomatic unless a physical objection :) becouse residential ground is very expensive in the capital.--BIPU 17:26, March 19, 2012 (UTC) As long as there isn't a war in your country, I won't need heavy stuff. Actually, with Euskadi being a small nation, I guess there will be like 2 squads of Army MPs. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 17:30, March 19, 2012 (UTC) :To avoid me having to read right now all about your army, how many people are two squads? --BIPU 17:32, March 19, 2012 (UTC) No, I don't think you can invade somebody from a 100 square meter apartment, I just think its dumb to allow a nation to own an exclave in your capital city. Synthic 18:14, March 19, 2012 (UTC) It's not going to show on a political map, if that's what's bothering you. It basically means that if someone from your country throws a molotov onto the territory, they are attacking AS soil and it gives us the right to defend ourselves. Also, that you cannot evict us. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 18:44, March 19, 2012 (UTC) Go ahead with Euskadi. I suppose if some leftish students are shouting in front of your embassy becouse you have invaded some mid-east nation you are not going to shoot them from the window and in order to prevent more troubles you should cooperate with local police in case of bigger matters. :In the "rent contract" we will arrange a time period of, for example, 5 years that we can extend if everything is OK. :As I´m afraid Euskadi is going to be by the moment the only nation agreeing to sign, we will ask for some diplomatic, military and economical adventages that I will think in the next days. (Lower tariffs, rights to Euskadi based companies to operate in ASA under favored conditions, aquisition of military stuff from ASA, etc.)--BIPU 19:04, March 19, 2012 (UTC) :Sure, just be specific about what your conditions are. Also, all blanks have agreed to these terms, so I am not bothered! -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 19:49, March 19, 2012 (UTC) SW, why do you need a military unit in the embassy. You could just hire private security guards and the local police should cooperate on matters of more importance. HORTON11: • 20:27, March 19, 2012 (UTC) :In another universe, instead of helping, the local police raided my embassy with the intent or arresting Allied States citizens for self defense. It's common practice for embassies to have military units, and in my case, it's the army's duty to defend the Allied States and her assets at home and abroad. We still expect locals to cooperate though. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 20:30, March 19, 2012 (UTC) I said yes to the embassy and I would like to have a kind of diploamtic agreement between ASA and Euskadi. Nevertheless, the idea of ASA does not recognize any foreign nation as having jurisdiction over its citizens will bring many problems I'm afraid. It is totally impossible to acept that your nationals can kill, rape or anything in my nation and my police and justice can do nothing because if we arrest them you will invade our nation. This will mean that all non diplomatic ASA citizens will be banned to enter Euskadi and I'm sure we dont want this. --BIPU 17:38, April 17, 2012 (UTC) Obviously you can detain them or kill them if they pose an immediate risk to life, but you cannot keep them or try them in one of your courts. If my boys come knocking, you need to hand our citizens over, no questions asked. That's basically what this policy means. They are Allied States citizens nevertheless, and not citizens of the world which are free for all. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 17:51, April 17, 2012 (UTC) This will be totally unacceptable for any nation. If one of your citizens can not be arrested, tried and imprisoned in another country simply for the fact that your government does not want, this will inevitably mean that your citizens will be expelled from any country. Consider what that means for the economy, your business abroad, etc.. ASA is willing to pay that price?--BIPU 18:10, April 17, 2012 (UTC) It won't, simply because the Allied States controls a large part of the world's EVERYTHING and any country banning the Allied States citizens is dooming itself. It's a simple policy which is perfectly fair and acceptable. Why would you want to place dibs on my citizens anyways? At least I am not making it a military policy to go get them back, as my military's goal is to protect Allied States citizens and assets at home and abroad. Rather get a treaty going with the Allied States. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 18:19, April 17, 2012 (UTC) Fair??? Are you telling it is a fair policy? Of course... yes... An ASA citizen can go to my nation, rape and kill my daughter and go home for dinner becouse if my police arrest him and my courts send hin to prison your fighters are going to bomb my capital. Oh yes... it is a fair policy.--BIPU 18:28, April 17, 2012 (UTC) He will rape and kill your daughter then if we have an agreement, he'll be tried for rape and murder in the ALLIED STATES, simply because he's an Allied States citizen. If he had duel citizenship, it would be fine. Completely fair. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 18:32, April 17, 2012 (UTC)